[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Ravi @ Ravishankar Patel on 21 January, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5750
1 MCRC-1035-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 21st OF JANUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 1035 of 2016
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Versus
RAVI @ RAVISHANKAR PATEL
Appearance:
Shri Aatmaram Ben - Dy. Government Advocate for the
applicant/State.
Shri Prakash C. Patel - Advocate for the respondent.
ORDER
Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal dated 14.07.2015 passed
in Criminal Case No.394/2013 (State of MP Vs. Ravi @ Ravishankar Patel )
by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sihora, District-Jabalpur (MP) whereby
learned Trial Court has acquitted the accused (respondent herein) from the
charges under Sections 354(k)(1) and 506 part-I of IPC. Assailing the
aforesaid judgment, this petition under Section 378 (III) of CrPC for grant of
leave to appeal has been filed.
2. Brief facts giving rise to present petition are that as per the
prosecution case, the prosecutrix lodged a written report on 07.03.2013 at
Police Chauki Gosalpur against accused Ravi Ravishankar Patel stating that
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5750
2 MCRC-1035-2016
she was residing in Village Khitaula with her children and used to drop them
for school daily from Khitaula to Khirwa. The accused used to stop the
prosecutrix on the way between Budhagar and Khirwa, threaten her, used
filthy language, and attempted to outrage her modesty with bad intentions.
Accused further threatened that if she did not establish physical relations
with him, he would kill her. Subsequently, a report was lodged against the
accused.
3. It is contended by learned counsel appearing for State that
impugned judgment of acquittal passed by learned Trial Court is incorrect,
improper, and bad in law. The procedure adopted by learned Trial Court is
contrary to the evidence and material available on record and is perverse. It is
also contended that learned Trial Court has failed to properly appreciate the
evidence on record and has erroneously acquitted the respondent. The
prosecution has proved the commission of the offence beyond reasonable
doubt, and the testimony of the prosecution witnesses fully supports and
corroborates the case of the prosecution. Consequently, the impugned
judgment is liable to be set aside, and the accused (respondent herein)
deserves to be convicted in accordance with law.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/accused opposes the present
petition and submits that judgment of acquittal dated 14.07.2015 passed by
the Trial Court is legal, proper, and based on correct appreciation of
evidence. The prosecution has failed to prove the charges as mentioned
above beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, the petition seeking leave to appeal is
devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5750
3 MCRC-1035-2016
5. Heard learned counsel for the both the parties and perused the
material available on record.
6. On perusal of record, it reveals that Rajendra (P.W.-1), Rakesh
Patel (P.W.-2), Rewa Prasad (P.W.-4), Pooranlal Kushwaha (P.W.-5) and
Ravindra Patel (P.W.-6) have not supported the prosecution case and were
declared hostile. Despite cross-examination by the prosecution, none of these
witnesses supported the alleged incident and categorically denied the
prosecution version. Thus, the prosecution case rests solely on the testimony
of the complainant/prosecutrix. Even her testimony suffers from material
infirmities. It is further significant that although FIR was lodged on
07.03.2013, no specific date or time of the alleged incident has been
mentioned therein. This omission strikes at the root of the prosecution case
and renders the entire story doubtful. In the absence of corroboration from
independent witnesses and in view of the material contradictions on record,
the prosecution has failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
7. Perusal of the impugned order reflects that learned Trial Court has
duly considered all the evidence adduced by the prosecution. Learned Trial
Court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and has acquitted the
accused on the ground that the evidence produced by the prosecution is
mutually inconsistent and does not inspire confidence. The Trial Court has
meticulously examined the testimony of the witnesses, the surrounding
circumstances, and the material on record, and no infirmity is discernible in
the order of acquittal. The evidence on record, as rightly noted by the learned
Trial Court, has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt against the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:5750
4 MCRC-1035-2016
accused. The prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused
through credible, consistent, and reliable evidence. In view of the aforesaid,
the acquittal recorded by the Trial Court cannot be said to be perverse,
irregular, or contrary to law.
8 . Perusal of the record does not disclose any infirmity warranting
interference. Consequently, present petition seeking grant of leave to appeal,
being devoid of merit, stands dismissed.
9 . Let Trial Court record, if available, along with copy of this order be
transmitted to the Court concerned.
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
@shish
